Hopefully someone can post a Rotrex making the 600 whp Evolve claims on a dynojet. Drew made 600 whp at close to the same boost you had Andrew on your beta low CR motor, he also has a beta low CR motor so thats about as close a comparison as it gets.

BTW Andrew why did you guys stop using Rotrex in your kits and switch to HKS? Did you find that the HKS performed better at lower boost?

Roman, I made 645WHP SAE, at ~11psi. The AA development Stage 3 car made 560whp at ~10-11psi, so that's quite a difference ~85whp at roughly the same psi, both cars with lowered compression. I'm wondering why a few people in some circles claim the Vortech #'s are underwhelming, but yet had no comments on the Rotrex results.

Hopefully someone can post a Rotrex making the 600 whp Evolve claims on a dynojet. Drew made 600 whp at close to the same boost you had Andrew on your beta low CR motor, he also has a beta low CR motor so thats about as close a comparison as it gets.

BTW Andrew why did you guys stop using Rotrex in your kits and switch to HKS? Did you find that the HKS performed better at lower boost?

We use Rotrex with all of our kits as standard with the Hks being a option if the customer chooses. With the S65 kit I don't believe the 91-92 trim's were easily available at the time.

From what I have seen the Rotrex makes even more hp and tq throughout the graph at lower boost.

Quote:

Originally Posted by m3an

lol at guys mentioning heat soak of a front mount from a car on a dyno... Really??

Yeah I left that one alone..

Glad to see you found a better option. I was not aware that you switched over to Rotrex as the standard over the HKS.

Roman, I made 645WHP SAE, at ~11psi. The AA development Stage 3 car made 560whp at ~10-11psi, so that's quite a difference ~85whp at roughly the same psi, both cars with lowered compression. I'm wondering why a few people in some circles claim the Vortech #'s are underwhelming, but yet had no comments on the Rotrex results.

Sorry Drew I was not aware that it was that big of a difference.

It is hard to deny how good the vortech blower really is. Considering all of the performance records on the E9X M3 are dominated by Vortech powered kits I think the results speak for themselves.

(1) Is there such a thing as "Holiday Pricing" for SC kits? Looking to score a good deal over the coming holidays and I am in on any "group buy" for anything offered that's worthwhile (I am 100% stock).

(2) Both the VF620 and newly announced ESS-VT625 use the Vortech SC, they are the least expensive, and appear to have similar cooling. Are they about the same in performance and reliability? The free install offered for the VF620 has me very interested but the VT625 has a wider installed base and no reported problems.

(3) For me the most important thing is throttle response and how quickly the power comes on from lower RPMs and up. I have not been able to figure out which kit has the edge in this regard.

It seems very hard to get a true comparison of these kits as there is too much bias in these forums.

(1) Is there such a thing as "Holiday Pricing" for SC kits? Looking to score a good deal over the coming holidays and I am in on any "group buy" for anything offered that's worthwhile (I am 100% stock).

(2) Both the VF620 and newly announced ESS-VT625 use the Vortech SC, they are the least expensive, and appear to have similar cooling. Are they about the same in performance and reliability? The free install offered for the VF620 has me very interested but the VT625 has a wider installed base and no reported problems.

(3) For me the most important thing is throttle response and how quickly the power comes on from lower RPMs and up. I have not been able to figure out which kit has the edge in this regard.

It seems very hard to get a true comparison of these kits as there is too much bias in these forums.

Just waiting for a good holiday deal ...

im with you on this bud....

The technical geniuses and current sc owners are so busy arguing about data etc that they have forgotten some of us more simple folk that just need some straight forward advice. Which sc will provide us with best throttle response and increase in power at the lower rev range in the most consistent and safest way.....whoever can answer this question will get my vote and very possibly my money!

I drove a e92 with the VT650 kit a few days ago and must say i was very impressed with how it felt in lower gears and lower rev range. The one problem that seems to be consistent is traction... Too much gas in lower gears and it just spins the tyres.....

Roman, I made 645WHP SAE, at ~11psi. The AA development Stage 3 car made 560whp at ~10-11psi, so that's quite a difference ~85whp at roughly the same psi, both cars with lowered compression. I'm wondering why a few people in some circles claim the Vortech #'s are underwhelming, but yet had no comments on the Rotrex results.

Drew stop posting here... You don't play fair. Your car is on a different level

(1) Is there such a thing as "Holiday Pricing" for SC kits? Looking to score a good deal over the coming holidays and I am in on any "group buy" for anything offered that's worthwhile (I am 100% stock).

(2) Both the VF620 and newly announced ESS-VT625 use the Vortech SC, they are the least expensive, and appear to have similar cooling. Are they about the same in performance and reliability? The free install offered for the VF620 has me very interested but the VT625 has a wider installed base and no reported problems.

(3) For me the most important thing is throttle response and how quickly the power comes on from lower RPMs and up. I have not been able to figure out which kit has the edge in this regard.

It seems very hard to get a true comparison of these kits as there is too much bias in these forums.

According to your math Sal on the correction difference between your Dyno Dynamics and a Dynojet your customers will see about 600 whp on a Dynojet with your kit as the whp numbers you have posted for your kit on your dyno are around 520. You just posted that a Dynojet will add another 15% to that number. I look forward to these customer independent 600 whp dyno's on Dynojets as that would be very impressive IMO for the Rotrex with only 7.75 psi. According to the dyno below done of the Rotrex C38 by Active you would need 10 psi and water meth to get to around 550 whp on a similar air/air supercharger system. There must be something you are doing that is very different than Active is or your using different math, please keep us posted.

When people start using the STD correction method with positive upwards correction it is indeed around 13-15%. This optimistic method has almost become the norm now. That is what I am referencing. I should not need to reference every single thing I say but if I have to then so be it.
If my maths is wrong on this then I guess we will just find out. I'm not afraid to be wrong.

When both dyno's are used properly without trying to prop up the numbers and using SAE when it's not over or under correcting too much we see them much closer together but still there is a difference.

NO OUR SUPERCHARGER KIT IS NOT GOING TO MAKE 600WHP UNLESS WE GO 9PSI WHICH IS NOT GOING TO BE RELEASED FOR STOCK MOTORS.

There are lots of ESS cars making 550-590+ STD (especially in the early days) where this was being achieved with low boost.

The actual point I am trying to make is not being understood here. My posts are not about my kit, your kit, etc etc. This is not the relevance here.

Blower 1 vs Blower 2. I am showing how they differ in their compressor maps and that a Rotrex vs Vortech gives the same power at 6.5 PSi on the S65 and then also spun to approx the same percentage out of their max speed on the S62 on the exact same setup.

It shows how one one platform they differ quite qlot but give similar HP and on another they give about the same pretty much everywhere.

The point here is that they are similar and this theory of the Vortech being so superior is simply not true on stock engines.

If the mind set is not to believe it then there is nothing I can say to convince and nor am I bothered. I have put the information up, it is up to the readers to make of it what they see fit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roman@ESS

Independent dyno files "one direct from Active" below not a vendor made dyno comparison. Same correction factor used on both, ambient temps 10 degrees lower on the vortech dyno. This is the only independent data that exists until more files are made available.

Over so many years now our dyno delta's from our own machine have been exactly that of what independent tests. This can be seen time and time again on multiple forums and many models of car. You can verify that for yourself.
It makes absolutely no sense for us to create 'hype' and then it won't deliver.
The graphs I have put up were data tests for us only. We could have put this up ages ago in these debates. However, after being convinced that there is nothing wrong with putting data up we decided it's fine.

Blue Vortech V3 @ 8.5 psi Red Rotrex C38 @ 10 psi with water / meth.

You are still comparing apples with oranges on this example with respect to the type of blower.
Two different dyno's, different correction factor (method maybe the same but that is still irrelevant) and two totally different setups.

This is so far from a definitive test of Rotrex vs Vortech.

The test in the dyno's I have posted with boost logs are far more of a better comparison.

I have also made one thing very clear which again people seem to miss.
The setup and how the blower is used.
Try to setup a Rotrex like a Vortech and the Rotrex will fail... miserably.
I have already explained why in an earlier post. The Rotrex takes way more attention to detail due to it's much higher step up ratio (this is not a positive feature btw).

My comparisons above are between two setups which are very close in their efficiency - placement of filter, internal smoothness of inlet tract etc etc, minimal belt slip.

As you noted above, peak potential CFM on a compressor map does not mean the same power is made on all engines. It may well be that to the 550 rwhp range, the Rotrex and Vortech are pretty similar on the S65, but that does not mean they will necessarily be pretty similar after that. The compressor maps probably are not identical.

AA, for example, gave up on the Rotrex because it could not flow enough on a low compression S65. On the other hand, ESS has run the Vortech to 645 rwhp on a low compression S65.

It may well be that for more efficient stock compression motors making 550 to 600 rwhp, the Rotrex works just as well as the Vortech. We will have to see some dynojet comparisons at some point.

One thing I did not notice from the Rotrex C38-91 dyno comparison to the Vortech is any indication the big Rotrex has any torque advantage over the Vortech. I had been wondering whether the big Rotrex would sacrifice that. But daily drivability cannot be seen on the dyno, which is constant full throttle in one gear. Hopefully, on the road, the Rotrex offers some advantage over the Vortech.

We need more people like yourself on this thread.

Just to point out - the comparison can only be really done on setups where the overall efficiency of the system is similar.
Just a quick example - put the air filter at the back of an ESS kit and leave it open. Watch how the efficiency of the setup (not the Vortech) just takes a nose dive.
Put a HS Marstons £3000 intercooler on our Rotrex kit - see the efficiency go up.
Put a truck core in the place of our curent intercooler core - see it nose dive. More boost but less power because of the core quality rejecting too much heat.
Take the ESS kit and change the charge cooler core a really poor one with a high pressure and high heat rejection - you see the efficiency drop. Less boost and even less HP.

I hope people are beginning to understand what I am talking about now.

The C38-91 on the S65 comparison shows more HP being generated upto the red line. If it producing more HP at the same RPM's it is producing more torque.
I can post or send you the power vs torque graph of the same examples.

The very reason that one compressor behaves better in different situations is the reason we don't care about which blower we use. If we find an ASA (523) or Vortech to be better on really low compression engines then so be it, we will use it. It's pretty common knowledge now that the Vortech bracket/belt drive is already developed by us.

(1) Is there such a thing as "Holiday Pricing" for SC kits? Looking to score a good deal over the coming holidays and I am in on any "group buy" for anything offered that's worthwhile (I am 100% stock).

(2) Both the VF620 and newly announced ESS-VT625 use the Vortech SC, they are the least expensive, and appear to have similar cooling. Are they about the same in performance and reliability? The free install offered for the VF620 has me very interested but the VT625 has a wider installed base and no reported problems.

(3) For me the most important thing is throttle response and how quickly the power comes on from lower RPMs and up. I have not been able to figure out which kit has the edge in this regard.

It seems very hard to get a true comparison of these kits as there is too much bias in these forums.

Just waiting for a good holiday deal ...

We have a 20% off going on for the wounded warriors charity. This includes every product we make.

Just to point out - the comparison can only be really done on setups where the overall efficiency of the system is similar.
Just a quick example - put the air filter at the back of an ESS kit and leave it open. Watch how the efficiency of the setup (not the Vortech) just takes a nose dive.
Put a HS Marstons £3000 intercooler on our Rotrex kit - see the efficiency go up.
Put a truck core in the place of our curent intercooler core - see it nose dive. More boost but less power because of the core quality rejecting too much heat.
Take the ESS kit and change the charge cooler core a really poor one with a high pressure and high heat rejection - you see the efficiency drop. Less boost and even less HP.

I hope people are beginning to understand what I am talking about now.

The C38-91 on the S65 comparison shows more HP being generated upto the red line. If it producing more HP at the same RPM's it is producing more torque.
I can post or send you the power vs torque graph of the same examples.

The very reason that one compressor behaves better in different situations is the reason we don't care about which blower we use. If we find an ASA (523) or Vortech to be better on really low compression engines then so be it, we will use it. It's pretty common knowledge now that the Vortech bracket/belt drive is already developed by us.

Not sure where you come up with your data Sal but like usual it is extreamly flawed. Filter placement makes 0 difference on our kit outside of heat. We have tested filter placement during development of our kit, with or without or mounted directly behind the blower and it made no difference in efficiency. Final placement had to do with access to fresh air. Your comment on swapping cooling cores is at best laughable. Our aftercooler core is an original Garrett core designed for 1000 HP. The front mount heat exchanger is a OEM Porsche heat exchanger. Intercooler pump is the same you will find in a Mercedes 55 AMG.

For someone who is selling his first supercharger system and someone who did not engineer the kit he is selling you sure come across like an expert on FI. Any R&D and testing you claim to have done on your kit was done by TTS. You and I both know this. Im not sure why you continue to pretend that you engineered the kit you are selling I would stick to reselling stuff others develop for you with your added mark up and spend less time trying to talk down about other vendors products who happen to do their own development and R&D.

Does this manifold look familiar? It should it the TTS Audi manifold that for some reason looks exactly like your M3 manifold. I guess if you swap the TTS logo with Evolve you can take credit for their development on this kit also.

(1) Is there such a thing as "Holiday Pricing" for SC kits? Looking to score a good deal over the coming holidays and I am in on any "group buy" for anything offered that's worthwhile (I am 100% stock).

(2) Both the VF620 and newly announced ESS-VT625 use the Vortech SC, they are the least expensive, and appear to have similar cooling. Are they about the same in performance and reliability? The free install offered for the VF620 has me very interested but the VT625 has a wider installed base and no reported problems. Both are great options and I would say similar in terms of performance. When it comes to reliability ESS has the edge due to the amount of kits on the market. Its also safe to say the VF kits have proven to be reliable so far.

(3) For me the most important thing is throttle response and how quickly the power comes on from lower RPMs and up. I have not been able to figure out which kit has the edge in this regard. This is relative, I would go out on a limb and say both the ESS and VF kits will be similar here because of the blower selection. I have driven a few ESS cars and have no complaints over the throttle response. It is very responsive and not too much, you can tell a lot of time was spent on the tuning.

It seems very hard to get a true comparison of these kits as there is too much bias in these forums.

Not sure where you come up with your data Sal but like usual it is extreamly flawed. Filter placement makes 0 difference on our kit. We have tested filter placement during development of our kit, with or without or mounted directly behind the blower and it made no difference in efficiency. Final placement had to do with access to fresh air. Your comment on swapping cooling cores is at best laughable.

For someone who is selling his first supercharger system and someone who did not engineer the kit he is selling you sure come across like an expert on FI. Any R&D and testing you claim to have done on your kit was done by TTS. You and I both know this. Im not sure why you continue to pretend that you engineered the kit you are selling I would stick to reselling stuff others develop for you with your added mark up and spend less time trying to talk down about other vendors products who happen to do their own development and R&D.

Does this manifold look familiar? It should it the TTS Audi manifold that for some reason looks exactly like your M3 manifold. I guess if you swap the TTS logo with Evolve you can take credit for their development on this kit also.

I've refrained from posting in this thread for over 10 pages now because I cant stand the idiocity that comes out of the mouths of the very same handful of delusional people Ive went back and forth with in previous threads, but this post pretty much puts an end to the thread. The truth always comes out

Not sure where you come up with your data Sal but like usual it is extreamly flawed. Filter placement makes 0 difference on our kit outside of heat. We have tested filter placement during development of our kit, with or without or mounted directly behind the blower and it made no difference in efficiency. Final placement had to do with access to fresh air. Your comment on swapping cooling cores is at best laughable.

For someone who is selling his first supercharger system and someone who did not engineer the kit he is selling you sure come across like an expert on FI. Any R&D and testing you claim to have done on your kit was done by TTS. You and I both know this. Im not sure why you continue to pretend that you engineered the kit you are selling I would stick to reselling stuff others develop for you with your added mark up and spend less time trying to talk down about other vendors products who happen to do their own development and R&D.

Does this manifold look familiar? It should it the TTS Audi manifold that for some reason looks exactly like your M3 manifold. I guess if you swap the TTS logo with Evolve you can take credit for their development on this kit also.

Always on the attack aren't you

What's the point in discussing something with someone who has zero technical knowledge and compares apples with oranges??

If filter placement makes zero difference then you really are defying physics. So why would fresh air make a difference?

It's temperature related!! Stick to sales Roman.

The information about TTS has been posted before right at the beginning of when our kit was in development.
We know who was behind that.

Your company ethics and practices are pathetic to say the least and posting such information makes you look so bad.
You think you can just pull up a picture, combine the fact that TTS is the actual Rotrex distributer in the UK and use this to take away the credit from us?

I'm afraid you'll have to try a little harder than that.

Maybe we should post up where all of your parts are made and out sourced to? No wait, we don't do resort to such unethical tactics.

A total and utter disappointment from the company who sells the most superchargers and who should not even care....
However you do.

When we first released images of our plenum there were ESS owners saying our plenum looked like yours! Now it looks like a TTS Audi one?

You should think before you talk. That TTS manifold is a charge cooler setup. That means it has cores inside. Ours is designed for inter cooling and has deflection plates inside.

The shape, size and design is completely different. Every single manifold on the market has some type of split shoulders showing a V8 on it. Are they all copies of the TTS manifold too?

How do you also explain the amount of insight and understanding we have on our kit to a depth which is way beyond what the average person even understands. Where does all of the information come from? Just regurgitated?

Not sure where you come up with your data Sal but like usual it is extreamly flawed. Filter placement makes 0 difference on our kit outside of heat. We have tested filter placement during development of our kit, with or without or mounted directly behind the blower and it made no difference in efficiency. Final placement had to do with access to fresh air. Your comment on swapping cooling cores is at best laughable. Our aftercooler core is an original Garrett core designed for 1000 HP. The front mount heat exchanger is a OEM Porsche heat exchanger. Intercooler pump is the same you will find in a Mercedes 55 AMG.

For someone who is selling his first supercharger system and someone who did not engineer the kit he is selling you sure come across like an expert on FI. Any R&D and testing you claim to have done on your kit was done by TTS. You and I both know this. Im not sure why you continue to pretend that you engineered the kit you are selling I would stick to reselling stuff others develop for you with your added mark up and spend less time trying to talk down about other vendors products who happen to do their own development and R&D.

Does this manifold look familiar? It should it the TTS Audi manifold that for some reason looks exactly like your M3 manifold. I guess if you swap the TTS logo with Evolve you can take credit for their development on this kit also.

I have never attacked your or ESS personally although I may have attacked some of your fanboys.
But attacking other companies like this is downright cheap and dirty. Didn't expect this from you.

(1) Is there such a thing as "Holiday Pricing" for SC kits? Looking to score a good deal over the coming holidays and I am in on any "group buy" for anything offered that's worthwhile (I am 100% stock).

(2) Both the VF620 and newly announced ESS-VT625 use the Vortech SC, they are the least expensive, and appear to have similar cooling. Are they about the same in performance and reliability? The free install offered for the VF620 has me very interested but the VT625 has a wider installed base and no reported problems.

(3) For me the most important thing is throttle response and how quickly the power comes on from lower RPMs and up. I have not been able to figure out which kit has the edge in this regard.

It seems very hard to get a true comparison of these kits as there is too much bias in these forums.

Donbona just so we're clear I'm not a fan boy nor have I ever preached anything but the truth and facts, many people who have met me in person will tell you the same or I believe they would

Hey I even offered you my Albanian girlfriend bro ! You know why ?
Cause I never get jealous when I see my girl with someone else, because my parents always taught me to give my used toys to the less fortunate.
Now lets all get the fuck along and have an orgy !!!!